Literature DB >> 30554529

Medical Students Learn Professionalism in Near-Peer Led, Discussion-Based Small Groups.

Maria C Cusimano1,2, Daniel K Ting3,2, Jonathan L Kwong4,2, Elaine Van Melle2, Susan E MacDonald2, Cheryl Cline2.   

Abstract

Problem: Medical educators recognize that professionalism is difficult to teach to students in lecture-based or faculty-led settings. An underused but potentially valuable alternative is to enroll near-peers to teach professionalism. Intervention: We describe a novel near-peer curriculum on professionalism developed at Queen's University School of Medicine. Senior medical students considered role models by their classmates were nominated to facilitate small-group seminars with junior students on topics in professionalism. Each session was preceded by brief pre-readings or prompts and engaged students in semistructured, open-ended discussion. Three 2-hour sessions have occurred annually.
Context: The near-peer sessions are a required component (6 hours; 20%) of the 1st-year professionalism course at Queen's University (30 hours), which otherwise includes faculty-led seminars, lectures, and online modules. Senior facilitators are selected through a peer nomination process during their 3rd year of medical school. This format was chosen to create a highly regarded position to which students could aspire by demonstrating positive professionalism. Outcome: We performed a qualitative descriptive evaluation of the near-peer curriculum. Fifty-six medical students participated in 11 focus group interviews, which were coded and analyzed for themes inductively and deductively. Quantitative reviews of student feedback forms and a third-party thematic analysis were performed to triangulate results. Medical students preferred the near-peer-led discussion-based curriculum to faculty-led seminars and didactic or online formats. Junior students could describe specific examples of how the curriculum had influenced their behavior in academic, clinical, and personal settings. They cited senior near-peer facilitators as the strongest aspect of the curriculum for their social and cognitive congruence. Senior students who had facilitated sessions regarded the peer teaching experience as formative to their own understanding of professionalism. Lessons Learned: Formal medical curricula on professionalism should emphasize near-peer-led small-group discussion as it fosters a nuanced understanding of professionalism for both early level students and senior students acting as teachers.

Entities:  

Keywords:  educational models; near-peer; professionalism; qualitative; undergraduate medical education

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30554529     DOI: 10.1080/10401334.2018.1516555

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Teach Learn Med        ISSN: 1040-1334            Impact factor:   2.414


  4 in total

1.  Implementation and evaluation of a near-peer-facilitated medical ethics curriculum for first-year medical students: a pilot study.

Authors:  Mikalyn T DeFoor; Lauren East; Paul C Mann; Carol A Nichols
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2019-12-06

2.  The Efficacy of Interdisciplinary Near-Peer Teaching Within Neuroanatomical Education-Preliminary Observations.

Authors:  Charles F C Taylor; Octavia R Kurn; Steven P Glautier; Deepika Anbu; Oliver Dean; Eva Nagy; Kate R Geoghan; Charlie H Harrison; December R Payne; Sam Hall; Scott Border
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2021-02-19

3.  Value-rich exposures in medical education: phenomenology of practice according to the lived experiences of medical students in Iran.

Authors:  Hakimeh Sabeghi; Shahram Yazdani; Seyed Abbas Foroutan; Seyed Masoud Hosseini; Leila Afshar
Journal:  J Med Ethics Hist Med       Date:  2021-07-13

4.  Teaching functioning, disability and rehabilitation to first year medical students.

Authors:  Christoph Gutenbrunner; Birgit Kubat; Simon Kröhn; Hermann Haller; Jörg Schiller; Christoph Korallus; Christian Sturm
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 2.912

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.